Thanks for your quick reply. I will add some contrast and try to lighten. It wasn't backlit, although sun was quite high.
Cheers
Mark
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
NEW Editing advice thread
Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
-
Originally posted by mtaylor334 View PostHi there
Would someone be kind enough to offer me some advice on the following image:
JetPhotos.com is the biggest database of aviation photographs with over 5 million screened photos online!
Dark / Underexposed
Too much or too little contrast
Dirty Scan / CMOS Dust spots
The histogram looks OK to me. Please advise what I should look to change?
The dust spots did not show up in Lightroom, as far as I recall and are very faint in the check that you have recently added (which is very helpful). I thought that there was some tolerance in place
Thanks for any advice.
Cheers
Mark
Leave a comment:
-
Hi there
Would someone be kind enough to offer me some advice on the following image:
JetPhotos.com is the biggest database of aviation photographs with over 5 million screened photos online!
Dark / Underexposed
Too much or too little contrast
Dirty Scan / CMOS Dust spots
The histogram looks OK to me. Please advise what I should look to change?
The dust spots did not show up in Lightroom, as far as I recall and are very faint in the check that you have recently added (which is very helpful). I thought that there was some tolerance in place
Thanks for any advice.
Cheers
Mark
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by dlowwa View PostNot really. I still see this a likely being a contrast rejection. Unless you have specific motivation for wanting this accepted, perhaps best to leave it for the personal collection.
Have a nice day!
Best regards,
Julian S.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Siddarth.Bhandary View PostHi,
Need some help with these:
1. https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=5889565. I leveled the shot using verticals around the Hyatt signage on the roof. That's what I typically use for these angle compositions
2. https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=5893873. I wanted a nose close up composition. Should I crop more on the left to just the fuselage. My thinking was that it would cut the radar dish and unbalance the picture
3. https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=5893864. Are the chocks clutter? Honestly I could not help those from any angle. Composition is for tight nose close up similar to this another pic of mine https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/8591135.
4. https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=5898361. Based on the discussion in the forum earlier, I was asked to use to vertical lines in the center (light poles in this case) to level the shot. Previously hangar line was used.
Thanks and regards,
Siddarth
2. Simply an awkward crop/composition.
3. Chocks are fine, so shouldn't have been a obstr./clutter rejection, but again awkward crop, especially with the door cut.
4. This is a very tricky one with conflicting verticals all over the place. Yes, verticals in the center are generally favored, but strong verticals (like buildings) are favored over less reliable ones like light posts. Overall, the ramp in the background does appear to slope right, so some CCW rotation is needed.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Julian S. View PostThanks James for the info,
is version N°3 better now?
[ATTACH=CONFIG]7772[/ATTACH]
Leave a comment:
-
Hi,
Need some help with these:
1. https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=5889565. I leveled the shot using verticals around the Hyatt signage on the roof. That's what I typically use for these angle compositions
2. https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=5893873. I wanted a nose close up composition. Should I crop more on the left to just the fuselage. My thinking was that it would cut the radar dish and unbalance the picture
3. https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=5893864. Are the chocks clutter? Honestly I could not help those from any angle. Composition is for tight nose close up similar to this another pic of mine https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/8591135.
4. https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=5898361. Based on the discussion in the forum earlier, I was asked to use to vertical lines in the center (light poles in this case) to level the shot. Previously hangar line was used.
Thanks and regards,
Siddarth
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by LX-A343 View PostI would strongly suggest, not to go that path to delete imperfections, which were added in previous post processing steps. Look for solutions to sharpen a photo without getting jaggies in the first place. There are several helpful tutorials around, also in this forum.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Julian S. View PostHey Guys, i have a question as well.
This is rejected due to too much or too little contrast.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]7768[/ATTACH]
I have reworked it and this is what i have now.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]7769[/ATTACH]
Is the 2nd Version acceptable now?
Thanks in advance,
Julian S.
is version N°3 better now?
Thanks in advance again guys!
Have a nice day,
Julian S.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by HarryLi View PostDo you know how to use eraser to erase the jaggy after sharpening? I think it is a good way to avoid jaggys.Originally posted by Nito View PostPlease show how to erase jaggies after sharpening, it's good to know!
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by DirtyCrow View PostGot rejection for backlit on this
JetPhotos.com is the biggest database of aviation photographs with over 5 million screened photos online!
I am a beginner and not sure about this, but i thought backlit is if the sun is behind the aircraft. In this case the sun was somewhere between pilots 1 and 2 o`clock.
Can someone tell me, what backlit in this particular case means?
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Julian S. View PostHey Guys, i have a question as well.
This is rejected due to too much or too little contrast.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]7768[/ATTACH]
I have reworked it and this is what i have now.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]7769[/ATTACH]
Is the 2nd Version acceptable now?
Thanks in advance,
Julian S.
Leave a comment:
-
Leave a comment: